Final answer:
The statement about Val Plumwood's view on women being closer to nature bringing them closer to liberation is false. Plumwood argued against the nature/culture dichotomy that often leads to women's oppression. Additionally, historical evidence generally supports that women did not have the right to vote in the Revolutionary Era.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement "Placing women as closer to nature, according to Val Plumwood, places them closer to liberation" is False. Val Plumwood, a noted ecofeminist philosopher, argued against binary oppositions like culture/nature, male/female, and human/non-human. According to Plumwood, associating women with nature in a dualistic hierarchy actually contributes to their oppression rather than their liberation. It is a form of cultural stereotype that reinforces sexist and nature-exploitative attitudes.
When it comes to the roles of women during wartime, simplistic narratives suggesting that women were 'incapable of handling the burdens of war' are False. Historical evidence shows that women across various societies took on significant roles during war times, managing home fronts, working in factories, and even taking part in resistance movements.
The concept of women finding liberation through solidarity with one another, as described in the provided reference, speaks to the importance of collective consciousness among women, but it does not directly connect to Val Plumwood's ecofeminist arguments, which critically assess the nature/culture dichotomy.
In regards to historical constitutional rights, the statement that 'No state constitution in the Revolutionary Era allowed women the right to vote' is generally True. Women were largely stripped of the franchise until the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920, expanding suffrage to women in the United States.